Hello all. I’m glad I found this site. It’s like finding an oasis. I saw a reference on Richard Dawkins’ site and I’ve spent good few days reading the some of the posts -- particularly the mammoth Mannion ‘non-evasive psychic surgery posts, as well as the traditional Chinese medicine ones (I am from the UK but currently work in Singapore so it’s prevalent here – I’m also pregnant and the Chinese confinement rules I’ve come to learn are off the scale…)
I thought I’d leap straight in with a subject that really bugs me – detoxes – and maybe you can help me formulate a response to a discussion I’m having with someone on a pregnancy board.
My father’s friend was a top oncologist and I remember years ago having a discussion about detoxes and what a load of quick-fix snake oil they were. As I understand it from him, the liver and kidneys work, or they do not (in which case you’re in serious trouble and seeing a doctor anyway. You can eat healthily and cut back on alcohol and caffeine and get plenty of sleep and exercise. That will help you feel better after a period of living unhealthily. Unfortunately that’s not a quick fix like downing 4 pints of wheatgrass decoction a day and eating nothing but alfafa sprouts for a week. Anyway, I think we may all be singing from the same hymn sheet on this subject.
I had a discussion with a woman asking about Gillian McKeith’s (yes, the hunchback poo quack) 24 hour (now THAT IS a quick fix promise) detox and I advised against all detoxes and told the lady to eat healthy food, drink enough water, do some light exercise and get plenty of sleep AND spend the 20-30 quid she would’ve handed over to that old crone on a treat for herself.
The woman who runs the site challenged me (although to be fair, she’s no fan of McKeith)
The reason I feel driven to answer is that while the view seems perfectly reasonable at first, thinking about it, I feel it’s the thin end of the wedge and can be harmful in that it doesn’t encourage critical (enough) thinking about an important subject – one’s health – and also allows complementary therapists to get away with dubious claims and rip us off.
Plus there’s the old canard about evil Big Pharma vs non-profit (ha) complementary therapy.
I should add that I don’t believe in complementary therapy, only medicines and treatment that have been proved to work (of which some may be derived from plants, like aspirin) and those that haven’t.
Here she starts:
“Well if you stop drinking and take milk thistle, for instance, that may help to cut down "fatty liver" and improve other liver conditions. Although the tests on milk thistle have not yet been rigorous or extensive enough, that does not cancel out the effects that have been shown.”
She provided two sites (I can't post them as I've not reached the posting limit)
But the first one is just a summary of some research, saying no results have been conclusive, while the second explicitly states: “Clinical efficacy of milk thistle is not clearly established.”
So should I hand over my 10 pounds to the makers of milk thistle (for some reason this is viewed as less pernicious than handing over 10 pounds to big Pharma) on the basis of very little?
And besides, how in God’s Holy Trousers do I know I have a “fatty liver”. A doctor would surely need to diagnose alcoholic or non alcoholic steatohepatitis? And surely in that case I’m in better, more qualified hands (than myself and some herbalist) to proceed with possible treatment.
Then she says this:
“And, of course, there are no large pharma companies pushing a product that is available to everyone, and perhaps falsifying or nudging studies into it. Plenty of "standard" drugs have somewhat dubious, exaggerated or insufficient research behind them.”
Ah, evil pharma. I’m not sure what standard drugs that have insufficient research are – she doesn’t name them, but of course I concede that there have been some drugs whose side effects were eventually deemed too hazardous post approval (I’m a reporter and used to cover healthcare). But generally, medicine and science has an open mind and uses the testing methodology to continually reassess and refine. It’s called progress. I’m not sure we’re getting that here with exhortations to swallow spoonfuls of liquid we’re not sure works. And being satisfied with that.
Besides, it raises the question, if it’s been used to improve liver function since Greco-Roman times, wouldn’t doctors have pounced on it, tested it rigorously, and if it worked, prescribed it widely?
The last comment is:
"Eating sensibly" is not always the only way to improve our body's function.”
But surely if I was eating healthily and getting sleep and had cut back on booze and FELT ILL, I’d seek medical advice rather than randomly dose myself up with products that still COST money. Plus don’t illnesses and feeling ropey often just come and go? If all I relied on was my own anecdotal evidence that I somehow recovered because at the same time I was drinking some tonic, I’d be doing myself a disservice.
Also contained in this is a spurious idea that you can somehow improve on the normal function of an organ and create a super-organ running on absolutely all cylinders. Surely a responsible doctor/scientist with qualifications, experience and years of testing would desire that. But they generally don’t (the discussion over doctors prescribing complementary treatments is another area) think this way because the organs either work or they don’t, and if they don’t you have a problem, which may or may not go away of it’s own accord, but should be looked into by a trained professional.
Perhaps I’m being churlish. I’d certainly like to know more about how self-suggestion works and placebos and how seemingly taking charge of one’s health can help a patient recover.
Thanks for listening, and sorry for such a lengthy first post.
Don't apologise, some of my posts run to two or three lines
The main problem with debunking detoxification diets, is that diet manipulation has been touted by the medical profession from the time of Hippocrates. When one thinks about it most medicines are administered orally, and a lot have origins in or are related to plant extracts. Even to this day we continue to experiment with low carbohydrate, low fat, high roughage diets. Most of this is not well supported by evidence (though the low carbohydrate diet is better than most (NEJM last week). The result is to some extent criticising the woo mongers then becomes a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Where the departure occurs is that we at least try to construct clinical trials to test the ideas out, and avoid hyperbole (such as accusing the colon of being a known source of toxins - evidence not provided). Even in the detox area there are some attempts to understand what might be going on - see below:
Br J Nutr. 2008 Apr;99(4):883-92. Epub 2007 Sep 21.
A short-term intervention trial with selenate, selenium-enriched yeast and
selenium-enriched milk: effects on oxidative defence regulation.
Ravn-Haren G, Bügel S, Krath BN, Hoac T, Stagsted J, Jørgensen K, Bresson JR,
Larsen EH, Dragsted LO.
Department of Toxicology and Risk Assessment, National Food Institute, Technical
University of Denmark, Mørkhøj Bygade 19, 2860 Søborg, Denmark. grh@food.dtu.dk
Increased Se intakes have been associated with decreased risk of cancer and CVD.
Several mechanisms have been proposed, including antioxidant effects through
selenoproteins, induction of carcinogen metabolism and effects on the blood lipid
profile. In a 4 x 1 week randomised, double-blind cross-over study, healthy young
men supplemented their usual diet with selenate, Se-enriched yeast, Se-enriched
milk or placebo (Se dose was 300 microg/d for selenate and Se-enriched yeast, and
about 480 microg/d for Se-enriched milk) followed by 8-week washout periods. All
Se sources increased serum Se levels after supplementation for 1 week. The effect
of the organic forms did not differ significantly and both increased serum Se
more than selenate. Conversely, thrombocyte glutathione peroxidase (GPX) was
increased in the periods where subjects were supplemented with selenate but not
in those where they were given Se-enriched yeast or Se-enriched milk. We found no
effect on plasma lipid resistance to oxidation, total cholesterol, TAG, HDL- and
LDL-cholesterol, GPX, glutathione reductase (GR) and glutathione S-transferase
(GST) activities measured in erythrocytes, GPX and GR activities determined in
plasma, or GR and GST activities in thrombocytes. Leucocyte expression of genes
encoding selenoproteins (GPX1, TrR1 and SelP), and of electrophile response
element-regulated genes (GCLC, Fra1 and NQO1) were likewise unaffected at all
time points following intervention. We conclude that thrombocyte GPX is
specifically increased by short-term selenate supplementation, but not by
short-term supplementation with organic Se. Short-term Se supplementation does
not seem to affect blood lipid markers or expression and activity of selected
enzymes and a transcription factor involved in glutathione-mediated
detoxification and antioxidation.
Toxicon. 2007 Sep 1;50(3):339-48. Epub 2007 Apr 22.
The effect of feeding piglets with the diet containing green tea extracts or
coumarin on in vitro metabolism of aflatoxin B1 by their tissues.
Tulayakul P, Dong KS, Li JY, Manabe N, Kumagai S.
Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Yayoi
1-1-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan.
To clarify whether enzymes involved in aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) metabolism in pigs
respond to antioxidant agents, the effect of feeding piglets with diets
containing green tea extracts (Sunphenon) and coumarin on in vitro AFB1
metabolism by their liver and intestinal tissues was studied. The results showed
that coumarin reduced AFB1-DNA adduct formation by both liver and intestinal
microsomes, while Sunphenon did not have any effects. Both coumarin and Sunphenon
enhanced the glutathione S-transferase (GST) activity to conjugate AFB1 to
glutathione GSH in the intestine, although no effects were noted in the liver.
Changes of the expression of mRNA of GSTA2 and GSTO1 were not in parallel with
the observed changes of GST activity, suggesting that other GST subtypes are
involved in the GST activity toward AFB1. As for lipophilic-free AFB1
metabolites, coumarin reduced the liver microsomal conversion of AFB1 to
aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) and aflatoxin Q1 (AFQ1), but Sunphenon exerted no effects.
Both coumarin and Sunphenon enhanced the conversion of AFB1 to aflatoxicol in the
liver. All the results suggest that feeding with a diet containing coumarin
affects AFB1 metabolism to enhance AFB1 detoxification through the suppression of
P450 enzyme activity in the liver and the enhancement of GST activity in the
intestine. Feeding with a diet containing Sunphenon enhances AFB1 detoxification,
but the effects are noted mainly in the intestine.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000 Aug;9(8):787-93.
Modulation of human glutathione S-transferases by botanically defined vegetable
diets.
Lampe JW, Chen C, Li S, Prunty J, Grate MT, Meehan DE, Barale KV, Dightman DA,
Feng Z, Potter JD.
Cancer Prevention Research Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center,
Seattle, Washington 98109-1024, USA. jlampe@fhcrc.org
Glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) conjugate activated xenobiotics with
glutathione; thus, GST induction may improve detoxification and excretion of
potentially harmful compounds. Using a randomized cross-over design, we tested
the hypothesis that, in humans, serum GST-alpha concentration (GST-alpha) and GST
activity increase with vegetable consumption and that this effect is GSTM1
genotype dependent. Twenty-one men (10 GSTM1-null and 11 GSTM1+) and 22 women (15
GSTM1-null and 7 GSTM1+), nonsmokers, 20-40 years of age and not on medications,
ate four 6-day controlled diets: basal (vegetable-free), and basal supplemented
with three botanically defined groups of vegetables (i.e., brassica, allium, and
apiaceous). Fasting blood samples, collected on the last 2 days of each feeding
period, were analyzed for GST-alpha, serum GST activity [against
1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (CDNB) and 7-chloro-4-nitrobenzo-2-oxa-1,3-diazole
(NBD-Cl)] and peripheral-lymphocyte GST-mu activity (against trans-stilbene
oxide). The brassica, but not allium or apiaceous, vegetable diets (relative to
the basal diet) increased GST-alpha by 26% (P = 0.005) and GST (NBD-Cl) activity
by 7% (P = 0.02) in the GSTM1-null individuals, particularly the women. Apiaceous
vegetable supplementation decreased GST-alpha in the GSTM1+ men (P = 0.03). Among
the GSTM1+ women, both brassica and the allium diets increased GST-mu activity by
18% (P = 0.02) and 26% (P = 0.001), respectively. The vegetable diets had no
effect on GST (CDNB) activity, irrespective of GSTM1 genotype or sex. These
results demonstrate that GSTM1 genotype has a significant effect on GST responses
to diet and that brassica vegetables are most effective at inducing GST-alpha,
whereas both brassica and allium vegetables induce GST-mu. GST responses were
more pronounced in women than men, but it is not clear from this study whether
this is a dose-per-body-weight or a sex-specific effect.
Carcinogenesis. 1995 Sep;16(9):2125-8.
Effects of consumption of Brussels sprouts on intestinal and lymphocytic
glutathione S-transferases in humans.
Nijhoff WA, Grubben MJ, Nagengast FM, Jansen JB, Verhagen H, van Poppel G, Peters
WH.
Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital St Radboud, Nijmegen, The
Netherlands.
A high intake of glucosinolate-containing cruciferous vegetables, such as
Brussels sprouts (Brassica oleraceae), has been linked to a decreased cancer
risk, but the underlying mechanism is still unclear. The aim of this study was to
reveal possible modulating effects of consumption of Brussels sprouts on
duodenal, rectal and lymphocytic (i) glutathione S-transferase (GST) enzyme
activity, (ii) GST isozyme levels and (iii) glutathione (GSH) content. Ten
healthy non-smoking volunteers were randomly assigned to two groups in a
cross-over design. Five persons started on a glucosinolate-free diet (control
period), while the other five consumed 300 g/day cooked Brussels sprouts, at the
expense of 300 g glucosinolate-free vegetables (sprouts period). After 7 days the
regimen was changed for a further week. At the end of both periods blood samples
and duodenal and rectal biopsies were taken. Mean GST activity showed marked
differences between duodenal, rectal and lymphocytic cytosols (737 +/- 54, 321
+/- 29 and 154 +/- 14 nmol/min/mg protein respectively), but was uninfluenced by
the dietary regimen. Isozyme distribution varied greatly between the tissues. In
duodenum GST-alpha, -pi, and -mu isozymes were expressed in considerable amounts
(8441 +/- 1365, 3002 +/- 223 and 536 +/- 248 ng/mg protein respectively). Rectal
biopsies also contained above three GST classes, but here GST-pi was the most
pronounced expressed isozyme (2849 +/- 246) followed by GST-mu (495 +/- 242),
while GST-alpha was only present in minor quantities (149 +/- 31). In lymphocytes
only GST-pi (755 +/- 96) and GST-mu (83 +/- 54) could be detected. As a result of
the dietary regimen rectal GST-alpha and -pi levels were slightly increased at
the end of the sprouts period, by 30 and 15% respectively. GSH contents were
uninfluenced by the dietary regimen. In conclusion, consumption of
glucosinolate-containing Brussels sprouts for 1 week results in increased rectal
GST-alpha and -pi isozyme levels. We hypothesize that these enhanced
detoxification enzyme levels may partly explain the epidemiological association
between a high intake of glucosinolates (cruciferous vegetables) and a decreased
risk of colorectal cancer.
Thank you Pebble for an exhaustive reply.
Of course many medicines are derived from plant extracts. Like humble aspirin.
I suppose I'm questioning whether drinking herbal concoctions not yet proved to be effective is a particularly good idea, especially as they aren't free.
I remember writing a story a few years about on a study that found milk thistle to be ineffective in treating liver disorders, so I was interested in what this woman had to say about it (very little it seems)
She's basically saying if you have a fatty liver (do I?) then drinking milk thistle (whose effects even she admits are inconclusive) may help reduce the fatty deposits.
It just sounds bunk and why should I had over my money to the so called nice end of the healthcare market (herbalists) as opposed to seeing a doctor for a supposedly fatty liver and possibly pay evil Big Pharma for any eventual treatment if I needed it (which may end up being derived from plants, or may not)
But she then goes on to say that big pharma have falsified/rejigged their research (although she doesn't give examples) so why trust them, you might as well trust the milk thistle advocates.
This is not the way I approach my healthcare.
Yeah, it's the standard fall back of those who don't actually have anything to fall back on. "Sure you've got all those fancy facts and studies, but they're all faked so I'll carry on believing my nonsense anyway." Of course, pointing out that selling quack remedies is just as big business as selling real ones, and therefore all the claims about "big pharma" would apply just as much to their quackery of choice, never seems to get through to them.Originally Posted by dorisbonkers
An instinctive rule of thumb that we've all noticed is that if it's fun it's bad for you and if it's nasty it's good for you.
Thus cigarettes, alchohol and rich foods are bad for you. Fresh air, water and unprocessed foods are good for you.
It seems to work but it leads to a sort of self flagilation. If cutting down on junk food is good for you, how much better for you is subsiting on raw broccoli?
As it happens randomly adopting the latest bizarre food fad is unlikely to be any better for you than simply stopping doing bad things. There's nothing very wrong with meat, two veg and a dollop of mashed potato. A little research finds that steaming the veg retains the most nutrients and grilling the meat reduces the fat content for very little difference in tha taste of the meal. A little peek at the nutritional infomration tells you when a tasty snack is actually loaded with you're day's allowance of fat and should be considered a rare treat. It's in these moderate changes that most of the health benefits can be found, and such moderate changes are more likly to become lasting changes in habits with long term benefits.
However what to do if you've just had a major blowout. New Year and the Party season are over and it's a time for self reflection. How many mince pies? A whole pot of brandy butter, and I can't even remember what happened Saturday night. Well the sensible thing to do is to simply return to a life of moderation and limited indulgance. The damage has been done and the body will recover as best as it can so long as you odn't continue the abuse. However we feel bad, guilty. We want to do more than simply return to sensible habits. We want to do something to undo the damage we've done. To purge ourselves of this guilt.
That's where detox comes in. It offers harsh unforgiving penetence. A regime that nobody could keep up long term but a perhaps if I deprive mysel of anything enjoyable for a month, or subsist of something disgusting and repetative for just a week that will be punishment enough to counteract the enjoyment I've had recently.
Whatever this does for our state of mind in alietiating our guilt the benefits over straight forward sensible eating are minimal if they exist at all. At some extremes these untested unregulated miracle detox diets can actually be very harmful.
As for big pharma suppressing research. Alt medicine is nearly as big (about a third the size if I remember Ben Goldacre correctly). We tend to think of small independent sandal wearing hippies as the force behind Alt medicine. In fact it's a multi national industry worth billions of dollars influenced by all the same factors of corporate greed as so called big pharma. Except unlike big pharma, there's limited or no regulation in place to keep these captialst forces in check.
If the claims of alternative medicine are true then they should be easily proven by quality trials that the international nutraceutical manufacturers and huge health food chains could easily afford.
Yes Big Pharma has it's flaws. Firstly that's as irrelevent as the school yard excuse of a boy who's been caught fighting "he started it". however it is worth pointing out that the fact that we know so much about their flaws is because they're tightly and transparently regulated so that flaws are detected early and halted. Whereas alt medicine is subject to all the same capitalist temptations but none of the checks and balances, no requirement to demonstrate effectiveness, no system to gather evidence of side effects or interactions once on the market and even if without looking for problems doubts are raised, no requirement to withdraw a product.
It's like pointing out isolated cases of corruption within a police force and suggesting that the answer is chaotic vigilantism.
Cuddles, thank you
Matt, and you. A great post and you've helped crystallise (ooh, I can feel the positive energy vibrations from a smokey quartz...) my thoughts.
I should know better, this woman's site has a whole section on Astrology.
It's easy to dismiss the far-out stuff, far more insidious is the mainstream belief in natural stuff (because it's natural) without proof to back it up.
Thanks chaps
Dorisbonkers *sniggers* - great name!!!
Welcome to UKS.
To be honest, trying to argue rationally with people who've formed irrational beliefs for irrational reasons is like trying to nail blancmange to the ceiling. They tend to believe things for idealistic and emotional reasons and are impervious to things like facts and evidence.
I notice you say it's on a pregnancy forum. Perhaps you can use emotional arguments in return (fight fire with fire)? Herbal and unproven products are bad enough to take at the best of times as no one has much idea of what's in them thus no idea of their possible side effects. But taking drugs (because if they work that's what they are!) during pregnancy is always risky.
You could try asking what effect milk thistle has on developing babies' livers or other organs.
If they say it's 'natural therefore safe' then there's plenty of examples where 'natural is lethal'.
So what I'm saying is - the rational approach doesn't always (in fact very rarely) work and sometimes you need to tackle such arguments differently - like using appeals to emotion or appeals to fear - just like they do!
That's actually a completely meaningless statement!
If you have a fatty liver (how would you know if you did, how would you know if the treatment had changed it?) then milk thistle may help reduce fatty deposits.
'May', of course, being a weasel word that renders the claim meaningless.
Pointing out the absurdity of such statements might (weasel word!!!) help others to see through the claims.
It's difficult and I don't think there's a really good answer for how to deal with such arguments. People's beliefs are amazingly resilient and can stand up to seemingly endless refutation. People believe what they want to believe and nothing much can change it.
.
If you go to www.skeptoid.com, you should find a fairly recent podcast episode on detox. I can't link directly from work, but there will be a transcript as well.
The guy that does the podcasts is very good at spending 10 minutes covering the main issues, without going into too much detail and leaving the paths open for further research.
My wife was/is a big user of ivillage when she was pregnant, I was kind of shocked how much wooly thinking there was out there concerning pregnancy. Not an awful lot of bogus stuff that would do people harm, but a lot of misconceptions and myths.
Thanks. And I hasten to add the milk thistle thread came about not in a discussion on pregnancy. I've given up posting on pregnancy once someone told me "I hope you die on the operating table, you vain b&tch" when I posted I was having a planned c-section.
Here's her the gist of her reply
1. She's not anti Big Pharma - her OH has made a lot of money consulting for them - and she does not blindly accept anything. However the rigorous testing is not done on widely available remedies, such as milk thistle, because testing costs money and it's not in anyone's interest to do it to the levels
2. With the amount that she has drunk over the last few years she is fairly sure that her liver needs all the help it can get,
3. She likes the anecdotal and medical results on milk thistle.
4. There is a camp that says "all natural stuff is good", there is an equivalentally knee-jerk camp that says "all natural, non-medical stuff is pointless and you are a naive dupe for taking it".
5. Silymarin has been shown to work - but it needs more studies.
6. She is not convinced by my assertion that all detoxing is pointless and one only needs to eat better. She finds it inconceivable that all herbal, non-medical ingredients are useless and that there is no way to improve the running of my body except by eating a "balanced diet". A balanced diet may be lacking in many nutrients - essential fatty acids, for instance.
7. She is positive that her body can be helped to rid itself of all the unnatural crap that modern life and habits have thrown at it.
All this reeks of belief system rather than rational thought.
Thanks for the welcome John, my name is from Private Eye - the only two fans of Neasden FC.
Last edited by dorisbonkers; 1st August 2008 at 12:26 PM.
There's a lot of money being spent on alternative therapies. Only a tiny fraction would need to spent to improve the standard of evidence.1. She's not anti Big Pharma - her OH has made a lot of money consulting for them - and she does not blindly accept anything. However the rigorous testing is not done on widely available remedies, such as milk thistle, because testing costs money and it's not in anyone's interest to do it to the levels
Firstly the liver has lots of extra capacity (in living donor liver transplants only 1 lobe is transplanted). If she does not already have signs of liver failure and stops drinking it is unlikely to be problem.2. With the amount that she has drunk over the last few years she is fairly sure that her liver needs all the help it can get
Secondly the liver cells can divide (slowly) and so can regenerate themselves. As far as I am aware nothing has been shown to be of benefit (except stopping drinking/other hepatotoxins).
I don't think many people would say there is nothing good to be found from herbs etc. You mentioned aspirin from willow bark yourself. What I don't get is people who wouldn't want to extract the active ingredient from the natural product.4. There is a camp that says "all natural stuff is good", there is an equivalentally knee-jerk camp that says "all natural, non-medical stuff is pointless and you are a naive dupe for taking it".
Her criticisms are either against strawmen or don't stand up to criticism.
To be honest I think JohnJackson is right when he suggested she might already have fixed beliefs. I don't think I've ever managed to convince someone that far gone. There's always going to be some more skeptical people in the peanut gallery though- so maybe having an argument with them does some good.
How pleasant!
People who hold rational beliefs that are justified and who hold a naturalistic world view tend to do so in a calm manner. Those whose beliefs are irrational and unjustified tend to get very passionate, even fanatical, about them.
I bet the person who made the vile comment above thought of themselves as a wonderful person, in harmony with nature and goodness etc.
That's what these things boil down to. It's a world view based on idealism and ideology rather than evidence and reason.
.
This one is actually a good illustration between 'natural' medicine and the scientific approach to it.
Many people believe that Aspirin comes from willow bark. It's 'natural' and therefore this validates all of herbal medicine.
But it's not quite like that. The active ingredient in willow bark extract is Salicylic Acid. This is what reduces fever, relieves pain, etc. However, it causes a lot of problems with the stomach - gastral bleeding etc.
Scientists, after isolating the active component (Salicylic Acid), made some analogues of this compound and the one that showed similar medicinal properties but with much reduced side effects was Acetyl-Salicylic Acid - this is what's now known as Aspirin.
So yes, there is a compound in willow bark that had medicinal properties (and strong side effects) but science has used it to develop a similar, but much more usable, compound in its place.
So Aspirin is not found in willow bark - it was developed from a similar compound that was found in willow bark.
And that's how science uses 'natural' chemicals.
There are paralysing compounds in snake venom. Scientists looked at them, worked out which one was the most effective, altered the structure slightly to see if they could improve things further and such compounds are used to paralyse muscles in things like neurosurgery (where a twitch could be disastrous). They don't use 'natural' snake venom - they use compounds derived from it.
That's how science works with things that are produced in nature.
.
Isn't the internet great. people feel so free to say the things that would get them knocked on their arse if they said them in person.
I doesn't matter to me one jot but was your c section planned for reasons of vanity e.g. avoiding the worst of the strech marks? Or was the vain bitch comment doubly inappropriate?
Not forgetting that a few of the big Alt-Med companies are actually subsidiaries of Big Pharma companies
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks